Introduction
This essay examines Anton Chekhov’s short story “The Lady with the Dog” (1899) through the lens of New Criticism, a formalist approach to literary analysis that prioritises the text itself over authorial intent, historical context, or reader response. New Criticism, emerging in the mid-20th century, focuses on close reading to uncover meaning through structure, language, imagery, and paradox within the work (Tyson, 2006). In applying this framework, the essay explores how Chekhov constructs themes of love, morality, and human connection through narrative techniques, symbolism, and character dynamics, without reliance on external biographical or socio-historical factors. The discussion is structured into three key areas: the formal structure and narrative ambiguity, the symbolic significance of setting, and the use of irony and paradox in character development. By engaging with these elements, the essay aims to reveal the intrinsic complexities of Chekhov’s text and demonstrate how its meaning emerges from the interplay of its formal components.
Formal Structure and Narrative Ambiguity
A core principle of New Criticism is the emphasis on a text’s internal coherence and structure as a source of meaning (Brooks, 1947). In “The Lady with the Dog,” Chekhov employs a deceptively simple narrative structure that belies a deeper ambiguity, inviting close analysis. The story follows Dmitry Gurov, a disillusioned banker, and Anna Sergeyevna, the titular “lady with the dog,” as they meet during a seaside holiday in Yalta and embark on an illicit affair. The plot unfolds in distinct phases—initial meeting, separation, reunion, and an unresolved conclusion—mirroring the cyclical, unresolved nature of their relationship. Notably, Chekhov avoids a traditional resolution; the story ends with Gurov and Anna contemplating a future together while acknowledging the social constraints that bind them. This open-endedness, a deliberate structural choice, resists easy interpretation and compels readers to grapple with the text’s ambivalence about love and moral norms.
Furthermore, Chekhov’s use of a third-person limited perspective, primarily aligned with Gurov, reinforces this ambiguity. While readers gain insight into Gurov’s internal transformation—from cynical detachment to genuine emotional attachment—Anna’s inner world remains less accessible, often filtered through Gurov’s perceptions. For instance, when Anna weeps after their first intimate encounter, the text states, “she was crying from emotion, from the bitter consciousness of what had happened” (Chekhov, 1899, cited in Ford, 1999). However, her exact motivations remain unclear, creating a tension that New Critics would argue enriches the text by forcing attention to what is unsaid. This narrative restraint, a hallmark of Chekhov’s style, underscores the story’s refusal to provide definitive moral or emotional closure, aligning with New Criticism’s appreciation for complexity over simplistic conclusions.
Symbolic Significance of Setting
New Criticism also places significant weight on imagery and symbolism as integral to a text’s meaning (Richards, 1929). In “The Lady with the Dog,” the settings of Yalta and Moscow serve as more than mere backdrops; they function symbolically to reflect the emotional and moral states of the characters. Yalta, a seaside resort, embodies a liminal space of freedom and escape. Its open landscapes, warm climate, and transient population contrast sharply with the oppressive routines of Gurov and Anna’s everyday lives. The sea, frequently referenced, operates as a symbol of boundless possibility but also of danger, mirroring the allure and risk of their affair. For example, during their walks by the shore, the “monotonous noise of the sea” seems to echo Gurov’s initial indifference to love, yet it later accompanies moments of profound connection (Chekhov, 1899, cited in Ford, 1999).
In contrast, Moscow represents confinement and societal expectation, where Gurov returns to his loveless marriage and Anna to her provincial life. The transition between these spaces is not merely geographical but symbolic of the characters’ internal struggles. A New Critical reading would focus on how Chekhov uses these contrasting environments to structure the story’s emotional arc, with Yalta as the site of awakening and Moscow as the realm of repression. This binary opposition, embedded in the text’s imagery, invites readers to consider how physical spaces shape psychological realities without needing to contextualise Chekhov’s personal views or the historical realities of 19th-century Russia.
Irony and Paradox in Character Development
Another key concern of New Criticism is the identification of irony and paradox as mechanisms for uncovering deeper truths within a text (Brooks, 1947). Chekhov’s portrayal of Gurov is rich with ironic tension, particularly in the transformation of his attitudes toward love. Initially, Gurov is depicted as a jaded womaniser who views women with disdain, believing them to be “the lower race” (Chekhov, 1899, cited in Ford, 1999). Yet, as the story progresses, his encounter with Anna sparks a profound shift; for the first time, he experiences genuine longing and emotional vulnerability. This reversal is inherently ironic: a man who once sought fleeting pleasure becomes ensnared by a love that defies his cynical worldview.
Moreover, the relationship itself is steeped in paradox, embodying both liberation and entrapment. While their affair offers escape from the monotony of their respective marriages, it also binds them to secrecy and guilt. Anna’s repeated expressions of remorse—“I am a bad, low woman” (Chekhov, 1899, cited in Ford, 1999)—highlight this conflict, as does Gurov’s eventual acceptance of a “double life” split between public conformity and private passion. From a New Critical perspective, these contradictions are central to the text’s meaning, illustrating how love can simultaneously uplift and destroy. Rather than seeking external explanations for this paradox, such as societal norms of the era, a formalist reading would focus on how Chekhov weaves these tensions into the language and actions of the characters, creating a unified yet complex portrayal of human desire.
Conclusion
In conclusion, applying the lens of New Criticism to “The Lady with the Dog” reveals how Chekhov crafts a nuanced exploration of love and morality through formal elements such as structure, symbolism, and irony. The story’s ambiguous narrative, symbolically charged settings, and paradoxical character dynamics work together to create a text that resists simple interpretation, instead offering layers of meaning accessible through close reading. This analysis demonstrates the value of New Criticism in uncovering the intrinsic qualities of a literary work, prioritising the text’s internal coherence over external influences. The implications of this approach are significant for literary studies, as it encourages a focus on the craft of writing itself, fostering an appreciation for how form and content interplay to shape reader experience. Arguably, Chekhov’s story exemplifies the power of subtlety and restraint, inviting readers to find meaning in what is left unsaid as much as in what is explicitly stated. This formalist perspective, while limited in its exclusion of historical or biographical context, thus provides a robust framework for understanding the enduring complexity of “The Lady with the Dog.”
References
- Brooks, C. (1947) The Well Wrought Urn: Studies in the Structure of Poetry. Harcourt, Brace & World.
- Ford, R. (ed.) (1999) The Essential Tales of Chekhov. HarperCollins.
- Richards, I.A. (1929) Practical Criticism: A Study of Literary Judgment. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co.
- Tyson, L. (2006) Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide. Routledge.
